Internet, or computers is a new necessity Essay

This paper asserts that the pull inwork is non a luxury anyto a greater extent in everyday life, hence it is has beat a new fate and that the network today benefits numerous aspects of life physically, economically and socially. This paper give prove these assertions with evidence and counterarguments by overcoming by at least ane argument that whitethorn forwarded against. Starting with physical reason, it is argued by some(prenominal) that Internet is should only be used by those in the office and those who stick out the luxury of magazine and capital. Computers which atomic number 18 delegacypiriteds to glide slope the Internet are take uped only if one has currency is the excuse of some.This may create been the result a survey pick outed for the Ameri washbowls (Pew Research Center, 2006) where the respondents were all rich and in that locationfore they bum afford to arrest computers that would finally lead them to gain a continuous access in the Intern et. If one ask a group of people who stand no money, will they then answer the alike(p) thing or will they answer that they as well as need the internet only that they cannot afford? This paper believes the second argument that the lack of money in the meantime is equivalent to absence of need.This is argument may be the result the of movement to give one laptop for each nestling by a non government organization despite the utter lack of money of every child to have the access to the internet. The hidden reason is the indispens exponent of having to be linked to the world to benefit from the k flatledge economy. The lack of money should not be therefore a reason recognize that the need is not there. To further maintain this counter argument is the belief that a hungry man who cannot afford to eat does not mean that he or she does not need the food the food anyto a greater extent. What the hungry do is to find the means in order to have that food.For economic reason, it is argue d by some that access to the Internet via computers should only be accessed by those who have financial transactions via the network. The internet is supposed to facilitate business conferences among those who are into it like the banks. The said argument misses the point of having to have access in the Internet. Who else will not need the banking assiduity this time? If one belongs to a third world country and waits for a cash remitment from a first world country, does he or she not know that the money will have to pass through the Internet that links the banks around the world.In case the remitter and the expected recipient will encounter a problem with the remittance, will they not require the use of the Internet to facilitate the communication? If this happened before, they can talk via phone but this time a cheaper mode is available. They can chat in the Internet and they can solve their problem from there. That point of this counter argument is that business entities use th e Internet, the macrocosm will have to follow development the same be typesetters case that is demanded by the need of the times.It may be explained that the banking industry are interlinked around the world, hence to say that they are not interlinked is shortsightedness. Investors from richer countries of the world are pouring their investments in ridiculouser countries too with the expectation of the driveing the market. What will this rich investors do is to employ people from these poor countries and the moment these workers have financial capacity, they will immediately become members of the financial community that lives on computers and the Internet.With communication theory to have become cheaper, the Internet has employed many which afforded people to better educate them selves. Because of the Internet, people can now study online and can transact online. Shall not the better education and better communication caused by the Internet then? For social reason, Hertlein an d Sendak (n. d. ) also argued that progressively a part of everyday life, the Internet allows users to develop online interpersonal relationships and this resulted to breach of relationships and trust and commitment of previously existing assumed quixotic relationships.They thus argued for Internet infidelity resulting from these breaches. They also noted that fact that as the Internet has the ability to affect the structure, timing, and rhythm of relationships, it also inherently affects the manner in which a couple defines secretiveness in a way that couples who once felt that they were close and connected may now struggle with a new set of rules and codes of conduct that are ambiguous and upon which they may not agree under the present level of technology utilize the Internet.Seeing the effect of such change on interpersonal relationships, they saw the effect of a compromised intimacy and a devaluing of the primary relationship, potentially cascading into other significant problems. (Hertlein and Sendak, n. d. ). It may be counter-argued however that what may have been termed as internet infidelity may infer that as an increased license to advertise and let out oneself because freedom allows so. It cannot be argued that the Internet cause infidelity because it is the human person who made the natural selection to communicate for more freely to other people.To justify their points, Hertlein, and Sendak said that the paradoxical nature of online relationships has been noted by many where they illustrated cases of people engaged in online relationships that can choose to present a detached attachment. They explained that Internet allows for instancy of communication and interaction while maintaining anonymity thus allowing transmittal of pleaal self-disclosure. This, the authors instal causes elements of a disembodied corpo sincereity, easily abandoned high investment and strictly private proclamations of the union. (Hertlein and Sendak,n.d. )A gain this appears to be short sighted variant of the use of the Interne since it is still the human person who will make a choice and not the Internet. It may be argued that people make choices not the Internet. As further evidence against the use of the Internet, Hertlein, and Sendak found flirting in use of the Internet, masturbations committed online (Hertlein and Sendak , n. d). They cited Maheu and Subotnik who found flirtation leads to erotic satisfaction as there is a mental ability to disassociate the online sex with anything having to do with a persons real life. (M Mahu & R Subotnik, 9) They also cited research estimates that about 20% of Internet users while online to have engaged in some sexual activity (Cooper, Scherer, & Mathy, 2001). On a balancing note, as counterargument against the use of the Internet, Hertlein, and Sendak (n. d. ) cited that benefits from the use of the Internet such as the shift to better intellectual and emotional relationships of individuals d ue to individuals greater appreciation for online relationships.They cited a study, where participants reported greater levels of satisfaction with their online relationships than with their face-to-face relationships (Underwood, H & B Findlay, 127-140). They also noted greater freedom to express feelings that could not be done in non-virtual relationships specially the for men. Before one knows it one is confession all sorts of things in the Internet and it is good for people psychologically.Good relationships may be produced in the net because of more freedom to express oneself or the result of an incontrovertible marketing of the self. In ace-to-face communication, one who engages in a relationship must in many aspects expose ones identity to be potentially judged and the self cannot escape the agony of embarrassment. But in the Internet one can do many things like disguising in many names but with the eventual benefit of self stripping and more psychologically matured to face t he world.Thus, Hertlein, and Sendak found that Internet users shape personal demographic tuition to be in better compliance with what they assume to be others version of the ideal mate that in so doing, a person may better come to understand how ones hold creation can change. With the anonymity therefore afforded on the Internet that enhances ones ability to make headway any chosen identity, experimentation with different identities has become familiar commonly understood and practices by many in the Internet. What is the effect of all this is the social construction of self as highlighted and elevated?(Hertlein and Sendak, n. d). This paper has turn up that the use of the computer or the Internet has become a necessity physically, economically and socially. The arguments forwarded against were overcome by contrary evidence. The physical reason that only in the office have need of the internet has most made everybody not able almost able to live without the computer or the Int ernet because it is those who have the resources who make the world running by forcing almost every to see the benefits of the technology.One cannot refuse money passing through the high technology banking using the Internet. One will have to be eventually become part of the banking system of the international communication promoted by the Internet. The economic reasons are obvious. Who does not compliments cheaper cost of communication and faster way of service? Who would not want to see what is happening in the world when one will have the money to buy even a gadget to have access in the Internet? What would have caused the non-governmental organization to dream for one laptop for each child despite the financial incapacity to acquire one?Should we not rather conclude that there is a strong belief that they the acquisition of knowledge of more knowledge the faster way that will cause intellectual and economic prosperity of these children? There is also enough ground to overcome t he argument that that increasingly a part of everyday life, the Internet has allowed the online interpersonal relationships that resulted to breach of relationships and trust and commitment of previously which were romantic relationships before.That the Internet has the ability to affect the structure, timing, and rhythm of relationships, to have affected the couple definition of intimacy in a way that couples who once felt that they were close and connected may now struggle with a new set of rules and codes of conduct that are ambiguous are just sighs of enlightened path for more freedom to intimacy in other forms. It was explained that what may have been termed as internet infidelity is very a failure to appreciate and adjust to changing reality that people have become more socially adjustable indeed because of the technology.It was thus observed that people engaged in online relationships that can have a detached attachment, immediacy of communication and interaction while maint aining anonymity which transmittal of confessional self-disclosure. The finding by authors of more socially adjusted beings mere pointed to the need to have the technology these days where people could now have parties and occasions even if these people are apart from each other.The argument against by using on line or Internet infidelity is a shortsighted interpretation of the use of the technology as it is basic to understand that it is still the human person who will make a choice and not the Internet. The finding also that online activities resulted to flirtation leading to erotic satisfaction given the mental ability to disassociate the online sex with anything having to do with a persons real life is just a revelation that man has been doing the same thing in secret with or without the Internet.The Internet was invented to serve earth and since necessity is the mother of all inventions, one could not but accept the fact the invention has become a necessity. The ever increasin g growth of the industry are living proofs Internet is to remain in the lives of many people because not only that the advantages of far outweighs the disadvantages of having the same but the technology come into being because of the need to survive. Economically speaking technology increased production and productivity although population continuously grows. full treatment CitedCooper, Scherer, & Mathy, Overcoming over a 5-year Period, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 84(2) 35264, 2001 D Greenfield, Virtual Addiction. Oakland newly Harbinger Publications, 1999. Hertlein and Sendak, Love Bytes Internet Infidelity and the Meaning of Intimacy in Computer-Mediated Relationships, n. d. , www archive universal resource locator http//www. inter-disciplinary. net/ptb/persons/pil/pil1/hertleinsendak%20paper. pdf, Accessed July 14,2007 M Mahu & R Subotnik, Infidelity on the Internet. Naperville, Illinois Sourcebooks, Inc. , 2001, p. 9.Nie, N. Sociability, Interpersonal Relations, and the InternetReconciling Conflicting Findings, 2001, Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 45, No. 3, 420-435 (2001)2001 intelligent Publications, www document URL , Pew Research Center Luxury or Necessity? Things We arseholet Live Without The List Has Grown in the Past Decade December 14, 2006, www document URL, http//pewresearch. org/pubs/323/luxury-or-necessity, Accessed July 14,2007 Underwood, H & B Findlay, Internet Relationships and Their Impact on Primary Relationship, Behavior Change, 21/2, 2004, pp. 127-140.